By Carol Altmann

If Warrnambool City councillor and ALP candidate Kylie Gaston had one job to do this week, it was to make sure she pushed the vote to have racehorse training back on Levy’s Beach by December.

I have seen Cr Gaston move fast, but never quite as fast as on Monday night when – amidst roars of protest from the council gallery and dissent from three council colleagues* – she cracked the whip and moved the motion to allow the council to again issue beach permits to the Warrnambool Racing Club.

At that moment, Cr Gaston shifted from being an environmentalist, to an ALP candidate with an agenda.

It was a very public shift that shocked many of her long-time supporters, some of whom were in the gallery and who left the meeting visibly upset by the sense of betrayal.

Cr Gaston knew that the council was most likely breaking its own laws by allowing dozens of racehorses to be trained on what is a public coastal reserve.

Despite this, and rather than wait a day or two to confirm the legal advice, Cr Gaston galloped on as if there was no more vital issue than making sure the WRC has seamless access to our beaches once summer closes off Lady Bay to trainers from December 1.

The racing industry was so desperate to get back on the beaches that it even offered the WCC what was probably one step short of a bribe: they would fund most of a $400,000 new carpark at Lady Bay, for its own use, of course, and adding even more bitumen to our beach. Sorry, I forgot to mention it was a “bespoke” carpark.

Warrnambool Racing Club CEO Peter Downs, who also sits on the council’s Visitor Advisory Committee, must have been thrilled by Cr Gaston’s form.

Even more importantly, State Labor Government and Racing Minister Martin Pakula would have been delighted with the performance of the party’s candidate for the south-west.

As we know, Minister Pakula and our own independent Upper House MP and racehorse owner James Purcell have been pushing the whole racehorses-on-beaches issue like there is no tomorrow, such is the might and power of the billion-dollar racing industry.

Unfortunately for Minister Pakula, Mr Purcell and the WRC, however, the tomorrows were running out rapidly.

In just two weeks time, on October 30, the State Government goes into caretaker mode in preparation for the state election on November 24.

During “caretaker mode”, a government is discouraged from making any major decisions.

And also in just two weeks time, on October 30, Cr Gaston – and Cr Michael Neoh – take leave from the council to focus entirely on their election campaigns.

The clock was ticking.

 

Monday night’s urgent meeting, called at the behest of Minster Pakula, was a last chance for Cr Gaston – and Labor – to tidy up some very untidy business by hurrying the decision on the beach permits.

After all, if the legal advice came back to say that the council wasn’t breaking the law, then the racehorses were home and hosed.

And if the legal advice came back to say that it was breaking the law, then Minister Pakula still had two weeks to cook up a plan B.

(The council confirmed yesterday that it was breaking the law. Plan B – watch this space – could now see the Minster for Planning intervene.)

Of course Cr Gaston has denied her head-of-steam had anything to do with the State Government (“nothing to see here!”) getting in her ear.

No, for the once-committed environmentalist who says she loves Levy’s Beach, it was all about “compromise”. You know, give and take: we give the WRC our wild beach, and they take away the wildness, that sort of thing.

If it wasn’t so transparent and ugly, it would be darkly humorous.

Bu then, in the final act, things became even weirder.

Having pushed the vote, without time to properly consider the legalities, Cr Gaston told the local paper yesterday that it would have been better if the vote had not gone ahead.

I have read Cr Gaston’s quotes to the paper several times now, and they still don’t make sense:

“We didn’t really have time to think about it. It would have been great if that vote did not proceed.

“Waiting would have been best, but that was the position we faced at that time”, she said.

“There were a lot of people emotional, it was difficult, but I also knew that if the motion approved something that was illegal, the situation would resolve itself.”

 

What?

Back-pedalling often follows a backlash, but if Cr Gaston hoped to regain the respect of those who saw her as a genuine alternative to the old players, well, that horse has already bolted.

* Cr Gaston’s motion was passed with the support of Mayor Robert Anderson, Cr Sue Cassidy and Cr Tony Herbert. Crs Cassidy and Herbert are both angling to be the next mayor. Crs Peter Hulin, Michael Neoh and David Owen voted against it.

If you would like to keep seeing more pieces like this about local issues, please make a small contribution below.

Donate

By Carol Altmann

What the heck just happened?

Our Warrnambool City Council chief executive officer Bruce Anson earns a salary package of around $320,000 a year and yet it was left to a group of volunteers to reveal to us this stunning fact: racehorse training at Levy’s Beach is illegal.

Had Mr Anson not bothered to have his staff check this possibility before? Why not?

Why was it left to volunteers in the Belfast Council Reserve Action Group (BCRAG) to do all the leg work, which they did?

Even if Mr Anson hadn’t bothered to check the legalities since this whole racehorse issue blew open more than two years ago, he certainly knew about the legal issues by September 20.

That was when the Victorian National Parks Association (VNPA) contacted Mr Anson to tell him that the council was breaking its planning laws.

Mr Anson definitely got that memo, because he emailed a response to the VNPA soon after, saying he would ask the city planners to investigate.

(The city planners confirmed today that yes, it is illegal.)

Mr Anson was contacted on September 20 – almost a month ago – and yet he did not pass any of this critical information onto elected councillors, who found out about it last Sunday via an email from BCRAG.

The BCRAG email arrived just one day before councillors were to vote on whether to allow racehorses back in to Levy’s and it warned they were in breach of the law.

The vote went through 4/3 – Labor candidate Cr Kylie Gaston made sure of that – and the council agreed to once again issue permits to allow 60 horses a day on Levy’s beach and 40 on the dunes.

Let’s be super clear on what all of this this means.

It means elected councillors turned up to an urgent meeting called for Monday night to decide whether to allow dozens of racehorses back on to Levy’s Beach without having all the facts.

Facts that were already known to the CEO who seems determined, for reasons unknown, to make sure that what the Warrnambool Racing Club and Racing Minister Martin Pakula want, they get.

If this is not a red-hot scandal, I don’t know what is.

The thing is, it comes on the heels of so many other examples of information being provided to councillors or the public that is either wrong, mis-leading or incomplete.

Just this week we saw an attempt by council to chainsaw two 115-year-old Australian banyan trees from Raglan Parade this weekend because of false suggestions they were causing car accidents.

Last month we saw a mass correction published in the council papers when wrong budget figures were included in an earlier agenda.

Before that we saw rubbery figures provided to the public about how well Flagstaff Hill Maritime Village was travelling, when in fact it is going backward.

And that is just the stuff we know about.

Ratepayers – and councillors – rely on being given accurate information by its very well-paid senior council officers, with Mr Anson at the top of that tree.

We shouldn’t have to work this hard to get to the truth.

It shouldn’t be the case that every time a major issue arises, we have to strap ourselves in – volunteers, ratepayers, journalists, councillors – for another exhausting wade through the reports and fine print to see what is really going on.

But this has become the culture within the WCC and it is the culture that has developed under Mr Anson’s watch.

As BCRAG member Teresa O’Brien shouted out at Monday night’s meeting, “We just want to be told the truth”.

When the stakes are so high – wild beaches that will be trampled, or ancient trees that cannot be replaced – never has this plea been more important.

[Note: What happens next with the racehorses on beaches? Now that the WCC has been found in breach of its planning laws, the State Planning Minister Richard Wynne may intervene and grant permission. If not, the WCC can amend its planning laws, but this is a lengthy process. The State Government moves into caretaker mode on November 1, before the state election on November 24. The Warrnambool Racing Club and Racing Minister Martin Pakula are desperate to have this resolved before then.]

If you would like to keep seeing more pieces like this about local issues, please make a small contribution below.

Donate

By Carol Altmann

It has been a bit like pulling teeth, but the Warrnambool City Council has finally released more detail about why it has rented two properties to two of its staff for – in one case – more than 30 years, and 14 years the other.

The five-page article posted on its website is a direct response to the stories that have appeared here about one senior WCC staff member living in the old bank building at 130 Timor St, part of the Archie Graham Centre, since 1987 and currently paying about $190 a week.

This property also saw about $43,000 from the Archie Graham capital works budget used to build a new garage, retaining wall, garden bed and sealed driveway in a spend that sources say incensed many of the Archie Graham staff.

The other property is a beachside former caretaker’s residence, currently rented at $221 a week.

Both are open-ended, on-going leases with no end in sight.

So, what is the council’s more fulsome explanation as to how these arrangements work and why they exist?

You can read the whole thing for yourself here – please, do – but the nub of it appears to be that these two properties are “unusual” and the council is lucky to find good tenants to rent them:

“Because of the unusual locations and nature of these properties if Council staff were not renting these properties they would not be made available for rent to the general public and Council would lose income.”

What exactly makes the properties “unusual”?

Well, according to the council’s explanation, the Archie Graham tenant is virtually a live-in security guard, turning off lights and appliances left on by the staff and centre clients, and, on occasion, even responding to attacks by vandals:

“Over a recent weekend the staff member was able to set in train urgent repairs when an intoxicated individual smashed a glass entrance door.”

Further, the tenant can only access the apartment via the main entrance to Archie Graham, which I guess when you put all of these things together, means that not all WCC staff could be entrusted with such an arrangement and they could not be guaranteed a good night’s sleep.

(Apparently councillors were also told privately in response to my stories that the tenant had to share a bathroom with the public. This does not appear in the public explanation and my sources say that such a claim is is not correct.)

The beachside house apparently has similar issues with noisy passersby:

“In the past the house at Shipwreck Coast Holiday Park has been made available to the public to rent but Council experienced difficulties in the rent being reliably paid and tenants finding the level of amenity acceptable with regard to being in close proximity to excited holiday makers.”

I will leave that image of the excited holiday makers for you to ponder.

As I say, read the full statement – it is too long to reproduce here – and I will finish with just one or two more points.

First, I recently asked the Local Government Inspectorate if these two lease deals breached the Local Government Act because, under the Act, a lease of more than 10 years must be advertised.

The inspectorate contacted the council CEO Bruce Anson and reported back to me that, no, the leases did not breach the Act because neither was for more than 10 years, even though one is 31-years long and the other inching toward 15 years.

I think George Orwell would be impressed.

I don’t know how frequently these leases are renewed, but the collective total for each is definitely more than 10 years. This, according to the inspectorate, is an “alleged loophole”.

Moving on.

Much of the council’s response has been about privacy and protecting people’s names and addresses:

“As a responsible landlord and to ensure the privacy and security of the tenants, Council will not broadcast the identities of the tenants in these homes.”

Some readers may also share this view.

But I have to point out that this issue is about due process, not particular individuals, which is why I have not published names.

Nothing written about the people in these two properties is not on the public record. You can visit the council offices and read the lease register, which is a public document and the reason it is public is because it deals with public property.

Of course Mr Anson, parts of the council, and probably the tenants in question, would all prefer we didn’t go poking about in lease registers and asking questions about rents and new garages and sealed driveways and forcing them to write long statements justifying their actions, but this is exactly what we need to do – and what I do on your behalf – because that, as we know, is all part of a healthy democracy.

A freedom of information application asking for copies of the two lease agreements is still being processed. Thankyou to those of you who donate $ to help me pay for these applications. If you too would like to support independent journalism, please consider making a small contribution below.

Donate

By Carol Altmann

A few days ago, the South Australian town of Port Pirie had a mural by convicted sex offender Rolf Harris in one of its theatres and now it doesn’t: it has been painted over.

No hand-wringing, no agonising that all “art” is sacred, and – thank god – no piece of black Perspex bolted over the top like a giant cover-up, which is the best the Warrnambool City Council can do with the Harris mural at the back of the Lighthouse Theatre.

Once the presence of the painting became public, its owner – the Northern Festival Centre – acted swiftly. Less than a week later, the painting is gone.

Such a decision rests on one simple belief: that we no longer tolerate sexual abuse and sexual assault against women, children or men.

Warrnambool City Council, are you taking notice?

See how this works? (Note, Crs Sue Cassidy, Peter Hulin and Tony Herbert earlier this year voted to get rid of the Harris mural. Crs Neoh, Gaston, Anderson and Owen voted to keep it covered.)

Despite the Port Pirie decision, Caravaggio paintings are still hanging in galleries around the world. Churches are still standing. And, despite warnings from our own council CEO Bruce Anson, there has been no revival in Port Pirie of the anti-intellectual book burnings of Nazi Germany, although I guess it is early days.

No, there has been none of that muddying rubbish. The decision-makers at the Northern Festival Centre just got on with it and got rid of it.

And I applaud them. Oh my, how I applaud them.

We can no longer say that we “didn’t know” what these sexual predators did: we do know.

And we can longer say that we “don’t know” the horrific impact that sexual assault and abuse has on the survivors: we do know and in 2018, celebrity is no longer an excuse.

From Bill Cosby, to Don Burke, to Donald Trump, to Brett Kavanagh, to Harvey Weinstein, to Kevin Spacey, to Rolf Harris, to Woody Allen, to Roman Polanski, to Pablo Picasso (#hannahgadsby #nanette), these perpetrators are being brought to account via the growing #metoo movement.

I keep hoping that one day, some day, the Warrnambool City Council will show a similar leadership to that of the Northern Festival Centre in Port Pirie.

Until then, we will continue to be a city that makes excuses for the inexcusable and that, to me, will always be a source of great shame.

If you would like to support independent journalism, please make a small contribution below.

Donate